Hi Kashyap, > About the the CELL having an additional byte, I meant that the CELL size > would be 2*WORD + 1... that should work too right? I would not need any > masking in that case.
I see. Yes, that would work. But it would either double the memory usage, or require some management of this additional byte (e.g. in a separate, parallel byte heap), which complicates things a lot more than it benefits. ☺/ A!ex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
